Hi all, posted this for Willy essentially given his clear empathy from some of his posts, but would be interested in comments from all who view.
Apologies for any loss of quality or interruption (if any) before I get to see the result, my experience of Youtube is not always good.

Tony Williams.

P.S. am on holiday and have not brought my IAC memb. no. with me, hope moderators might be able to get round this

I think this is an excellent film. I also think that the lower image quality works to the films advantage and enhances the atmosphere of the film.
I congratulate you on your choice of background music, it really matches the spirit of the film especially for the final scenes.

What a great piece of editing! You have assembled all the mountain of archive material, stills, posters etc into a powerful statement about the waste of war. The first music bothered me a bit but the main song works well.

Issues:

Red text is a problem because few video systems handle it well. I guess you wanted the impact of "written in blood". There is a lot of text scrolling and that is not easy to read online or - probably - on a large screen.

The flickering of the archive footage is acceptable until you cross-fade to or from a still which is not flickering. Several times I was aware of a still/poster etc centre screen and a flickering grey/black at the sides as the next archive footage faded in. It might be worth experimenting with other transitions to see if this can be reduced. (You could go frame by frame through the archive material balancing up the brightness and contrast until they all match ... but might reach your 100th birthday before you finished!

Ironically some competitions insist that borrowed material, such as archive footage, should not take up more than 10-15% of a film. You use such material almost throughout but give it fresh impact and point by the interaction between scenes and the music. You have made something new out of it.

Thanks for your comments Peter, you clearly like the film which for me is what it's all about (as for anyone), the mixed reception it has received since showing here and there has covered the entire 0-10 scale, people either connect with it or do not it seems, but that will always be the case with all film I'm sure and you too Dave, I find your analytical approach to criticism interesting and useful and, I've got to say, while the points you raised did not occur to me at the time of making or afterwards, they have now caused me to view the film from a different perspective, you know how it is when engaged in 'the making' when sitting on top of the process over a period of time, you can easily forget that there was ever a wood there and (as with letter writing) the tendency to alter this and that can cause a complete re-write.

By the way, I have found that to get those who conversely do not like a particular end product to talk about their reasons why the most difficult thing and yet, if done so with the best of intentions those crits can be the most helpful.

Well done, Tony, Very moving. It's amazing that one hundred years ago such dangerous scenes were already filmed.
The cameramen were also heroes. Some weeks ago one of our IAC-friends (Ray Williamson) asked me if he could copy my films "Will Ye Go to Flanders?" and "On the Road to Passchendaele" for some friends. Of course he could. My documentaries are now at the Screen Archive South East, University of Brighton. The more people see such terrible scenes the better. Also your "In Memoriam" is very touching, Tony. The music in the middle and at the end is well chosen.

If you ever come to Belgium, Tony and other friends... please do not forget to visit one of our 156 Commonwealth Cemeteries in Flanders' Fields. In particular "Tyne Cot Cemetery" (more than 12,000 gravestones of British soldiers and 3 German soldiers). It's very impressive. Some months ago some Australian soldiers were re-buried. Remains of young men are still found in our fields.

When seeing all these scenes and graves you realize what happened during the War of Madness. Only in Flanders 500,000 young men were killed and what for ? For the "glory" of some idiots? That's what you also want to tell us in your film "In Memoriam", Tony. Your message is clear.

"Tyne Cot Cemetery" is only 6 miles from Ypres. Most British people only visit "The Menin Gate" at Ypres.

When I had shown my film at BIAFF about 7-8 years ago one of the judges said to me: "You have shown too many gravestones in your documentary! ". I did not understand him... A Jew buried next to a Christian... a Welshmen buried next to a German... Scotsmen, Lancashire Fusiliers, young boys from Yorkshire, Australians, New Zealanders, South Africans, Chinese .... The judge was one of my close friends... He apologized.

Hi Willy, thank you for commenting on my film and I am pleased you found it as I intended it to be, a moving piece of work designed to 'bring home' the futility and stupidity of war in all its' manifestations. The first world war as you have pointed out was particularly so mainly because of the scale of involvement and its' eventual outcome which I am still puzzled as to the benefits of, I don't see any especially when wars (on a smaller scale perhaps) still rage around the world and human suffering continues, perhaps it is as has been said, one of the reasons for human beings being and it is only as we (some of us) get older that we do indeed recognise the senselessness.

I was in the British Army for a time when younger and travelled to Normandy on one occasion on one of the organised commemorative visits that are sanctioned from time to time by the British Government when a particularly 'high-profile' milestone is reached (50yrs etc.) and visited the Commonwealth War Grave cemeteries there. Row upon row of carefully tended graves of all nationalities stretching as far as the eye can see and not a word passed between any of those who were present all lost in their own thoughts and yet here were we expected to do as ordered as and when required and so we did in the Falklands' War of 1982 and while not without its' justification on the one hand, yet another political manoeuvre on the other. Despite the reasoning, lives were lost and others ruined once more. When will Politicians learn? But then again perhaps they have.

I like what you have done and think that a lot more films of a similar composition will help future generations to be better educated as regards their heritage.

Did you have any trouble with YouTube and Copyright? I note your Credit at the start of the film.
I have just done an AV for my Brother of his photographs of Aden in 1957-58 and put some Louis Armstrong Music on it. I purchased the Music many years ago and have the disc etc. YouTube objected and I replied that I had purchased the music and was a member of the IAC and held their Copyright licences.
I then got these replies!
Firstly;
"Hi Cam
Good news! Your dispute wasn’t reviewed within 30 days, so the copyright claim on your YouTube video has now been released.
Video title: "Pajc Aden"
- The YouTube Team

and Secondly;
"Your dispute wasn't approved.
The claimant has reviewed their claim and confirmed it was valid.

You may be able to appeal this decision, but if the claimant disagrees with your appeal, you could end up with a strike on your account.

Viewing restrictions
Video blocked in 1 country (Germany)

Monetization
Monetized by claimant
There are still other claims on your video.
If you agree with these conditions, you don't have to do anything.
Learn more "

The deal between YouTube and the principal Music Agency in Britain means that far fewer such challenges arise. Broadly speaking YouTube provides the Agency with a list of how often in the quarter each title they hold the rights for has been played and pays a sum to be passed on to the rights holders.

But each rights holder can refuse to allow the use of their work at all - it rarely happens but has done if a tune was associated with a topic the musician found unpleasant. Or the rights holder (or her/his agent) can insist of being allowed to "monetize" which boils down to tacking as advert onto the video - usually of the type that plays before the film and which you can skip after 5 seconds.

To add extra fun (!) The music industry divides the world into areas, each of which is handled by a different Music Agency. For the German speaking lands that is an Agency called GEMA, which is notoriously strict. It sounds as if they are insisting that when your video is watched in German territories they be allowed to tack on an advert.

The extra waffle seems to mean that YouTube say you could appeal that decision, but if the appeal went against you then you might get a black mark on your record.

Do you care if any viewers in Germany have to sit through a few seconds of advertising before watching? If not ... then forget it.

And the IAC licences? They only cover the older traditional uses of "amateur films" in the UK and do not really handle internet viewing. The broad YouTube/Music Agency agreement mentioned above covers use in Britain.

Hi John C, note your problems with Youtube but, other than the attachment of ads which as Dave says can be skipped pretty much immediately, I had no problem at all with the upload or eventual broadcast.

When I first decided to upload to Youtube by the way, I was not a member of the IAC and spent something like a month trying to track down (and get answers from) the copyright holders of the two Pink Floyd tracks which feature in this film, turned out to be something of a minefield, for a start not all Pink Floyd material copyright is held by the same company and -it seems- copyright ownership changes hands like something in a card game. Eventually, it turned out, Warners (a fairly recent developmental off-shoot of Warner Bros. as far as I could tell) owned the copyright to these two tracks and so I sent them an e-mail pointing out my intentions (non-profit making, amateur level only, stupidity of war, WWI centenary year etc. etc.) and would they very kindly extend the use to me please of these two tracks at no cost of course for the purpose of putting this film together for which I would -of course- forever be eternally grateful. That was March of last year and I'm still waiting for a reply (in fact I've long since given up on a reply as you might imagine).

I'd been looking at joining the IAC for a while and one of the major attractions was the copyright flexibility which is available within the membership package and so signed up. I make it a rule these days to include the caption as you noted as an opening caption to any film I do and which might be seen outside the regular scope of friends and family if it contains mainstream (copyrighted) music or anything else, but that is not to say it is a 'catch-all' remedy nor that it will work every time, as with Dave Ws'. comments further high-lighting copyright difficulties and as I said up there somewhere and as I have to finally admit, I doubt that I (certainly) will ever fully understand the complexities of copyright law and a bit like the Warner Bros e-mail, have pretty much given up trying to.

Got to say also, that when I check my Youtube acc. this does not tell me that this film has gone 'viral' yet but when it does, I'll expect a bit more hassle.

Thanks for your comments by the way,

Tony Williams.

p.s. I always had the idea that featured artistes would not only be flattered (assuming certain standards) by inclusion of their work in anybodys' film, particularly when such things could serve only to increase their profile (and perhaps profits), but have come to understand that not many BIG names know (or particularly care perhaps) what's happening to their stuff these days and it is the 'bottom-line' which copyright holders hold dearest above all else.

First of all Tony may I comment on your film. I too found it very good, appropriately in good taste and technically good. I agree with Dave, red titles are a 'no no' - they are always hard to read. Good strong white with drop shadows are best every time. The opening scrolling statement is too long in my opinion and it is saying the obvious anyway.

As to copyright, you too have found how complicated this subject is. Do your best is all you can do. Obvious breaches for commercial gain are very unwise, innocent amateur use nearly always succeeds. I have a number of my old 'cut to music' films which had a lot of publicity and circulation at the time (1970's), on You Tube now. Not a word of complaint (now I'll invoke 'Sod's Law'! By the way, a lot of us find Vimeo a better forum for our films, more serious oil makers use it and the quality is great.